Madras High Court
A.Suyamprakasam vs The Assistant Commissioner on 9 April, 2021
W.A.No.419 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
and
THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.A.No.419 of 2021
and C.M.P.No.1671 of 2021
1.A.Suyamprakasam
2.G.Kesavan
3.C.Chinnasamy
4.R.Krishnan
5.C.Koriappan
6.C.Kandasamy
7.A.Govindaraj
8.V.Chennimannan
9.Sivagami
10.M.Mallaiyan
11.T.Ramalingam
12.S.Thilagam Sounder
13.V.Gopalakrishnan
14.K.A.Thambiraj
15.Veliangiri .. Appellants
Vs
1.The Assistant Commissioner,
Land Reforms, Erode.
2.The District Revenue Officer,
Land Tribunal, Thanjavur.
3.The Tahsildar,
Krishnagiri Taluk,
Krishnagiri District.
Page 1 of 6
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.No.419 of 2021
4.R.Raghavan
5.Mottaiyan @ Reddiyar
6.Pattan
7.Mani
8.Kantha
9.Sakki @ Sakkiammal
10.Samakkal
11.Govindammal
12.Perumathammal
13.Amaravathi
14.Chandra
15.Rajammal .. Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act to
set aside the impugned order dated 14.06.2019 in W.P.No.34662 of
2007.
For Appellants : Mr.M.Abdul Razack
For Respondents : Mr.J.Pothiraj,
Special Government Pleader
for R1 to R3
Mr.Sathish Rajan for R8
No appearance for others
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)
This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 14.06.2019
passed in W.P.No.34662 of 2007, whereby the learned single Judge
disposed of the writ petition by remitting the matter back to the first
respondent and directed the first respondent therein to pass orders
on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the parties.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.No.419 of 2021
2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3.The appellants are the subsequent purchasers. Though it is an
order of remittal, remitting the matter to the first respondent in the
writ petition to hear the matter after affording an opportunity to the
parties.
4.Learned counsel appearing for the appellants brought to the
notice of this Court that the order passed by the first respondent in
the writ petition is only a consequential order and therefore, the
order passed by the second respondent in the writ petition will have
to be set aside and it is the said authority who has to consider the
matter on merit.
5.On the aforesaid aspect, learned Special Government Pleader
appearing for respondents 1 to 3 do not have any serious objection as
it appears to be an error committed inadvertently by the learned
single Judge.
6.In such view of the matter, the order of the learned single
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.No.419 of 2021
Judge stands modified by setting aside the order of the second
respondent in the writ petition and consequently the said respondent
is directed to pass fresh order after affording an opportunity to all the
parties including the appellants and the writ petitioners. Needless to
state that personal hearing will have to be given before passing
appropriate orders and the proceedings will have to be concluded
within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.
7.In view of the above, the writ appeal stands disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(M.M.S., J.) (R.N.M., J.)
09.04.2021
Index:Yes/No
mmi
To
1.The Assistant Commissioner,
Land Reforms, Erode.
2.The District Revenue Officer,
Land Tribunal, Thanjavur.
3.The Tahsildar,
Krishnagiri Taluk,
Krishnagiri District.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.No.419 of 2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.No.419 of 2021
M.M.SUNDRESH, J.
and
R.N.MANJULA,J.
mmi
W.A.No.419 of 2021
09.04.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
